Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-06-14 Thread Reuben Thomas
I thought it might be worth pointing out that this has already been done on a large scale, in Mac OS X. That is precisely why PPC and i386 gcc are now largely fixed. Also, that the Mac OS team did considerable testing, and now build almost everything with -Os. I heard this at a presentation fr

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-07 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 02:29:18PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Which have BIG caches, and thus might get sensible speedups if -Os manages > to make the entire thing fit inside the cache (which it just might, I have > seen non-exaustive reports of it working well for many people). W

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-07 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Sat, 06 May 2006, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > older machines) but also with amd64 (which I doubt there are any 64mb > AMD64 systems) and ia64 (which I very much doubt there are any 64mb Which have BIG caches, and thus might get sensible speedups if -Os manages to make the entire thing fit insid

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-06 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 04:44:23PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Initialiy this was for people with older computers, not a 2 GHz amd64 > with 2GB ram. Think P90 with 64Mb or slightly better. > > We are not talking "generally" here but "specific". Specific to > certain hardware. OP mention

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-06 Thread Dave Witbrodt
[Tried 'debian-user' with this question first, but there were no responses. Now trying here. I'm not subscribed to 'debian-devel' so please CC me if you respond!] Original Message Just out of curiosity, what is the Debian Way to change compiler settings like -Ox and -march

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-06 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 5/3/06, Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Just to see the effects of compiling programs with -Os, I tried to get the sources for firefox 1.5 from testing (which is what I use by default) and compiled it with -Os, instead of -O2. The program was much more responsive, with less use of swa

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-06 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:02:57AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > >> For Etch and Sid, it is probably a good idea to use -Os instead of -O2 at >> least on the bigger arches (ia32, ia64, amd64, etc), as we can probably >> trust gcc not t

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-05 Thread Thiemo Seufer
Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:02:57AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > > For Etch and Sid, it is probably a good idea to use -Os instead of -O2 at > > least on the bigger arches (ia32, ia64, amd64, etc), as we can probably > > trust gcc not to screw up. > > I

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-05 Thread Gabor Gombas
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:54:44PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > If gcc generally generates faster code with -Os than -O2, then isn't > that a gcc bug, in that the optimizations enabled by -O2 are incorrectly > picked? The problem is, "faster" is not a well-defined term. Faster when? I can w

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-04 Thread Lionel Elie Mamane
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 03:54:57AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > "Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Wait a second. Optimizing for size should decrease speed. >> That is the whole idea of size/speed optimization tradeoffs. > A lot of the time the reduced ram requirement can stop swa

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-04 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:02:57AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > For Etch and Sid, it is probably a good idea to use -Os instead of -O2 at > least on the bigger arches (ia32, ia64, amd64, etc), as we can probably > trust gcc not to screw up. If gcc generally generates faster code wi

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-04 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
"Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Rogério Brito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Hi there. > > I think that this may be interesting to anybody that has to work with > computers that are not the latest/more recent as most people in richer > countries seem to

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-04 Thread Joe Smith
"Rogério Brito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi there. I think that this may be interesting to anybody that has to work with computers that are not the latest/more recent as most people in richer countries seem to have. It seems to be that a good amount of peopl

Re: Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-03 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Rogério Brito wrote: > One way to mitigate the memory consumption is to, among other things, > compile packages with optimization of GCC set to -Os, instead of -O2, What -Os is likely to give you is much better cache locality, which might make the code run that much faster on

Compiling packages for the standard distribution with -Os instead of -O2

2006-05-03 Thread Rogério Brito
Hi there. I think that this may be interesting to anybody that has to work with computers that are not the latest/more recent as most people in richer countries seem to have. It seems to be that a good amount of people upgrade their computers in a regular basis and, then, don't notice how things